Tmax 400 sheet film

Hi,
I'm stuck in which film to buy limbo. I was decided on Tri-x 320, but...
I have found some information on the web that indicates tmy400 developed in D-23 gives very good results. I do like the advantage of the pre-hardened emulsion and the reciprocity is great. I do want that great "look" of tri-x. Anyone have used this combo. Also the developing time is long, which I need for I will be using a daylight tank, which from what I read does work, if longer times are used. So what are your thoughts on TMY and d-23 and the "look" of it. I will be doing the zone system and will be doing N, N-, N+.

I recommend you work with the tri-x 320. Start with a standard that works well in a variety of developers. If you want to branch out later, you'll have something to compare to. Many people don't like tmax film. I'm one of them. I've shot a bit of it lately and much prefer the tri-x look.

Hi,
I'm stuck in which film to buy limbo. I was decided on Tri-x 320, but...
I have found some information on the web that indicates tmy400 developed in D-23 gives very good results. I do like the advantage of the pre-hardened emulsion and the reciprocity is great. I do want that great "look" of tri-x. Anyone have used this combo. Also the developing time is long, which I need for I will be using a daylight tank, which from what I read does work, if longer times are used. So what are your thoughts on TMY and d-23 and the "look" of it. I will be doing the zone system and will be doing N, N-, N+.

Thanks,

Jennifer

Depends somewhat on what you want to ultimately do with the negatives. TriX is a standard that has been supported by photographers over time. Therefore if you want to rely on the experience of others this would be a good film.

If you want to develop a relationship with materials that have greater potential then TriX, I personally think Tmax 400 is an excellent alternative. Tmax 400 in pyro developers will build much greater density range. This amounts to a greater ability to do N+ development then you will find with TriX. TriX will not expand much past N+1 in my testing. Tmax has much greater expansion potential.

I did some testing of TMY a few years ago, and it looked very promising. It is a quality film, but requires VERY careful exposure and procession. Tri-X and TMY are on the opposite end of the spectrum in this regard as Tri-X is very forgiving with exposure and with processing.

TMY has a VERY short toe, so if you underexpose the shadows, detail is lost. Tri-X has a longer toe, so it will record some detail even if underexposed.

TMY is not a film for casual users, whereas Tri-X can be.

Last night I re-read Photo Techniques reviews of the Kodak B&W films after re-formulating them. Whereas TMY used to be finer grain than Tri-X, Tri-X is now finer and close to Plus-X. Then comes T-Max 100 as the finest.

This was from comparison with 1 batch of the newly formulated emulsions and may not be your experience.

Hi,
Thanks for the replies. I'm still pondering it. Using D-23 could one expect
N+2 and N-2 ?. I won't be using Pyro, or other related developers. I even decided to use nothing that uses "HQ". I had got some, and read hazards of it, and got rid of the stuff !. For paper dev i'm going to use mostly phenidone-ascorbic acid.

It is not exactly only the developer but how it works with the film. D-23 is mostly sodium sulfite and some Metol. I would wear gloves with tray developing to avoid dermitius from the Metol after a prolonged exposure time. I have several friends that are very alergic to Metol now so use it carefully. I am not saying don't use it just be careful.

Hi,
Thanks for the replies. I'm still pondering it. Using D-23 could one expect
N+2 and N-2 ?. I won't be using Pyro, or other related developers. I even decided to use nothing that uses "HQ". I had got some, and read hazards of it, and got rid of the stuff !. For paper dev i'm going to use mostly phenidone-ascorbic acid.

Jennifer

The data I posted reflects the response of TMY 400 film to a phenidone-ascorbic acid film developer (BTW, it is also a good paper developer). The Triethanolamine (TEA) supplies the alkali. The only other ingredient is water.

D23 is Metol, Sodium Sulfite and Water - nothing else. And as Lee has pointed out, Metol also has some toxic characteristics and must be handled with the proper precautions - gloves, for example.

Hydroquinone, Pyrocatechin (Catechol) and Pyrogallol are all closely related benzine ring compounds. They are all toxic if ingested or if the dry chemical dust is inhaled. If they are all handled properly, using appropriate chemical safety and disposal procedures, they do not constitute either a health or environmental hazard.

Tri-X. You are just getting started, do you want to be delighted or frustrated with
your initial results? I'm not sure about D-23, I'm using D-76H. (all you need is to
add borax to your chemical inventory) I don't think there is much difference in hardness/durability of emulsion, grain is not an issue. I just think it will be so much
easier to dial in your process and get beautiful, printable negatives quickly.
I'm sure with dilution you can get to N-2. N+1 should be easy as well. For N+2 I don't
know as I've never had occasion to push it that far. (that's where you may need the
borax) I've used TMX, Delta 100, HP5+ and tried FP4+ and TMY in sheet films.
Tri-X is a really nice flexible film, I can't see how you would regret the choice.